REGINA v DAVIS [2004] NSWCCA 281
The sentencing judge failed to take into account the effect of accumulation for the second offence, resulting in an inadvertent deviation from the statutory calculation for the non-parole period. The approach required by Pearce and Johnson was not applied, necessitating correction by the appeal court.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 August 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Sentencing Review
- Outcome
- leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- ['sentencing' 'non Parole Period' 'totality Principle' 'maliciously Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Sentencing Review
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Was the sentencing for the second offence consistent with the principles of totality and statutory non-parole calculation?' 'Should the error regarding accumulation and non-parole period be corrected?']
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge failed to take into account the effect of accumulation for the second offence, resulting in an inadvertent deviation from the statutory calculation for the non-parole period. The approach required by Pearce and Johnson was not applied, necessitating correction by the appeal court.
Court Disposition
leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed in part
Orders
- ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'In relation to the first offence, a non-parole period is imposed commencing on 3 September 2003 and expiring on 2 August 2006; the balance of the term to commence on 3 August 2006 and conclude on 2 April 2008; the head sentence is confirmed and will commence on 3 September 2003.' 'In...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment